Prucalopride: safety, efficacy and potential applications

Chronic constipation is a very common functional gastrointestinal disorder which can be associated with significant impairments in quality of life for some people with the condition. Its management has, traditionally, been based on dietary and lifestyle changes and the use of a variety of laxative agents. The evidence base for the efficacy of the latter is, in many cases, slim. Not surprisingly, many patients remain dissatisfied with laxatives thus leading to the development of more pharmacological approaches. Among these approaches is the use of prokinetic agents; while prior molecules have been troubled by lack of selectivity and cardiac side effects, the new agent, prucalopride, appears to be highly selective for the serotonin 5-HT4 receptor and is, therefore, a potent stimulator of gut motility. In three large pivotal randomized controlled trials, prucalopride has been effective in relieving the cardinal symptoms of chronic constipation; these effects have been sustained in open-label follow up for as long as 18 months. The safety profile has been encouraging and, especially so, the absence of arrhythmogenic potential. Studies in men, in constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome and in other motor disorders are eagerly awaited

Efficacy of Probiotics in Irritable Bowel Syndrome: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background and Aims Some probiotics may be beneficial in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), but differences in species and strains used, as well as endpoints reported, have hampered attempts to make specific recommendations as to which should be preferred. We updated our previous meta-analysis examining this issue. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register were searched (up to March 2023). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting adults with IBS, comparing probiotics with placebo were eligible. Dichotomous symptom data were pooled to obtain a relative risk of global symptoms, abdominal pain, or abdominal bloating or distension persisting after therapy, with a 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous data were pooled using a standardized mean difference with a 95% CI. Adverse events data were also pooled. Results We identified 82 eligible trials, containing 10,332 patients. Only 24 RCTs were at low risk of bias across all domains. For global symptoms, there was moderate certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Escherichia strains, low certainty for Lactobacillus strains and Lactobacillus plantarum 299V, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, LacClean Gold S, Duolac 7s, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal pain, there was low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of Saccharomyces cerevisae I-3856 and Bifidobacterium strains, and very low certainty for combination probiotics, Lactobacillus, Saccharomyces, and Bacillus strains. For abdominal bloating or distension there was very low certainty in the evidence for a benefit of combination probiotics and Bacillus strains. The relative risk of experiencing any adverse event, in 55 trials, including more than 7000 patients, was not significantly higher with probiotics. Conclusions Some combinations of probiotics or strains may be beneficial in IBS. However, certainty in the evidence for efficacy by GRADE criteria was low to very low across almost all of our analyses

Serotonergic and non-serotonergic targets in the pharmacotherapy of visceral hypersensitivity

Visceral hypersensitivity is considered a key mechanism in the pathogenesis of functional gastrointestinal (GI) disorders. Targeting visceral hypersensitivity seems an attractive approach to the development of drugs for functional GI disorders. This review summarizes current knowledge on targets for the treatment of visceral hypersensitivity, and the status of current and future drug and probiotic treatment development, and the role of pharmacogenomic factors

The PAC-SYM questionnaire for chronic constipation: defining the minimal important difference

Background: The Patient Assessment of Constipation-Symptoms (PAC-SYM) questionnaire is frequently used in clinical trials of constipation. However, the threshold for reduction in total PAC-SYM score used to define a clinical response on this 0-4 point scale has not undergone formal appraisal, and its relationship with clinical benefit as perceived by patients has not been defined. Aim: To determine the minimal important difference in PAC-SYM score, and the optimum cut-off value for defining responders. Methods: The minimal important difference was estimated using data from six international phase 3/4, double-blind, randomised controlled trials of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation (NCT01147926, NCT01424228, NCT01116206, NCT00485940, NCT00483886, NCT00488137), with anchor- and distribution-based approaches. Five appropriate patient-reported outcomes were selected as anchors. In addition, receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve analyses were used to investigate responder discrimination for each anchor. Results: Data from 2884 patients were included. Minimal important difference estimates ranged from –0.52 to –0.63 across the five anchors. Estimates were not affected by study location but were consistently lower for rectal symptoms than for abdominal and stool symptoms. Distribution-based estimates were considerably lower than anchor-based estimates. ROC curve analyses showed optimum cut-off scores for discriminating responders to be similar to anchor-based minimal important difference estimates. Conclusions: Anchor-based methods gave consistent results for the minimal important difference, at approximately –0.6, and this value was close to the ROC-determined optimal cut-off scores for responder discrimination. This value could be considered in clinical practice. A slightly more conservative threshold (eg –0.75) could be used in clinical trials to reduce the placebo response rate.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe